A book review is different from other history papers in that it does not ask you personally to discuss what happened in the past; instead, it asks you to discuss what one specific author/historian has said about what happened in the past. A review tells the reader what the author's goal was in writing the book or article under consideration, and whether the author fulfilled that goal or not. A review also should effectively describe the material presented by the author to sustain his/her thesis. This entails some summary of the book's contents, but it also asks you to consider the following questions:
Why has the author written the material (e.g., propaganda, historical records, nostalgia, personal advancement)? Determining the author's purpose will often tell you something of the author's choice of approach and evidence.
Reading
Critical reading is difficult. It involves more than turning pages or even remembering the words on those pages—a process of passive consumption. Rather, it involves understanding the material and asking questions about it—a process of active and creative participation. One does not simply absorb information but rather makes something of it.
First, read the table of contents, the preface, and the conclusion—or in the case of any article, read the first and last pages and the section headings. In this way, you get a mental map of where the author will lead you.
Then read the book or article, keeping up your side of the conversation by underlining, comments, questions, or angry exclamations in the margins (if you own the book). Do not let yourself get hung up on trivial points. THEN GO BACK AND TAKE NOTES.
One of the best ways to come up with a clear summary in your review is to analyze and discuss it piece by piece, chapter by chapter. Summarize each chapter and determine how the chapter contributes toward the author's argument. Your chapter summaries should include (1) a one-sentence statement of the author's thesis in the chapter, (2) a brief listing of the most important pieces of evidence the author uses to support his/her thesis in the chapter, and (3) one or two sentences about how the chapter ties into the main thesis of the book. Make sure you put down the page numbers on which you found your information so you have the citations available when you write your paper. Even if you are not sure about how to answer these three elements, write something down and take good notes. When you are ready to put your book review together, you will have good notes and summaries of the most important parts of the work and you can focus on expressing yourself clearly, rather than trying to figure out the book the night before the paper is due.
Think about what you have read and written. Better yet, talk about it with someone. You understand material best when you have to explain it clearly to someone else.
Writing
Audience
Do not write the review directly to or for the instructor in the course but direct your review to an unnamed, intelligent individual who could benefit from your careful assessment of the book. A review should be aimed at individuals who have not read the book already. That means you cannot assume they know anything about the topic even though they might be very intelligent and well educated. Tell your readers where the topic of the book fits in time and place.
Format
The review must be typed on unlined, white, 8-1/2-by-11-inch paper, using a ribbon dark enough to produce legible type. It should be double-spaced, typed in a 10- or 12-point font, and have a 1-inch margin on all sides. Number each page. Staple the pages together in the upper left-hand corner. Do not use a cover sheet. Do not use a folder of any kind.
Book reviews (like other brief papers) should not have subheadings or separate sections; they chop up the flow of your thoughts without contributing anything useful. Instead, use sentences that make the transition from one thought to another.
Length
You should write about a five-page book review.
Heading
This should include your name, the course number, the quarter and year, at the top of the first page. (Again, do not attach a cover page to your review.) Then give the publication information on the book you are reviewing, arranged, and punctuated as follows:
Henry Adams, Mont-Saint-Michel and Chartres (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1905, repr. 1989).
Introduction
Introduce the author of the book or article you are reviewing, mentioning his/her background and other important published works, if any. To find this information, go the Reference Room at the library and consult the dictionaries of national biography and other works that list brief biographies of scholars and writers. You might also look in the card catalogue to see if the library has other books by your author. Do not spend too much time on this search, or in writing about it in your review, but find out what you can, since it can often give you a clue about the author's approach to the topic.
Main Body of the Review
As you read the book or article, understand and identify the main points the author makes (e.g., ask yourself: "Can I summarize his/her argument in a few sentences?"). Be as specific as possible. Don't just recite a listing of the chapter titles, but tell the reader what was written and how convincingly it was presented. Analyze how his/her ideas differ from or parallel the ideas in other readings, lectures, and/or discussions. Discuss whether the book or article disagrees with information you have acquired in lectures, texts, or other books you have read. If there is a conflict in ideas, does that mean one is right and the other is wrong? How do you explain the conflict? Be aware of what approach the author uses to present his/her material. Does the approach in some way determine the author's conclusions? What is the relationship here?
Conclusion
You should conclude with an overall estimation of the book, including whether or not the author has any biases that you can discern (if you have not already dealt with this point). Judge the scholarly merits of the book or article. Are there notes referring you to the sources of quotations, interpretations, or specific points? Is there a bibliography or a bibliographical essay at the back of the book, referring you to other works on the topic that the author consulted? Is there an index to help readers refer back to names or places? Does the book or article lack maps and/or appendices which would be helpful? Does the author effectively use graphs and charts? What kinds of sources did the author use, primary or secondary, printed or archival? How up to date are the author's secondary sources? All of these things will help you judge the scholarly merits of the book, even if you do not know very much about the topic itself. Most importantly, did the author accomplish what he/she set out to accomplish in writing the book or article—why or why not?
Tips on Writing
Avoid long quotations from the book or article. Instead, use your own words, and be careful not to use phrasing that is too close to the author's. That is called plagiarism (literary theft) and is unacceptable. Try for a clear, direct, prose style without pretentious and/or flowery words or phrases that you would not use in ordinary conversation. If you are not sure of the precise meaning of a word you want to use, either look it up in the dictionary or choose a word that you do know. Try to make your sentences flow smoothly from phrase to phrase; say just what you want to say with an economical use of words.
In general, the present tense is preferable for works of history and for book reviews. Use standard, formal English; avoid contractions and colloquial or slang phrasing.
Vary the sentence structure to avoid boring the reader. Too many short, simple sentences strung together produce a choppy effect. Long, complex sentences should be used for variety, provided you can keep them under control grammatically. The aim is to produce an interesting, persuasive, sophisticated review, clearly phrased and neatly presented.
Assignment modified from one originally created by Deb Salata.
